‘Denying’ Senior Scale: Woes of the Shudras among the AMU Teachers

‘Denying’ Senior Scale: Woes of the Shudras among the AMU TeachersIn late August 2008 the then [plagiarist and scamster] VC, wreaked a kind of havoc, and made a [vindictive] alteration in the rules, pertaining to Senior Scale for the Asstt. Professors. His most unscrupulous slaves in the EC endorsed it, disregarding protests and note of dissent by some of the EC members. In early November 2008, a gang of teachers, slaves of the then administration, almost manhandled the teachers agitating, through the AMUTA-GBM, against such a regressive and unjustified move. The then VC did not however implement even that regressive rule amended by him. Consequently, a good number of teachers suffered, including some of his [own] slaves/footsoldiers; a fairly good number of teachers continue to suffer from absolutely unjustified stagnation.Now, the incumbent VC is reluctant about invoking 19 (3) to make necessary minor amendment so that justice prevails. He seems to have made a submission before the same disgusting bureaucracy, and has allowed them to become his dependable and trustworthy advisor. This particular section of bureaucracy extracted illegal favour of promotion for itself only to be undone by the UGC. At least one of our ex-representatives is said to have made his unofficial office in the chamber of one such 'wonderful' officer. The absolutely rightful prayer of the affected poor and hapless teachers has mischievously been mired into the web of disgustingly unjustifiable, immoral, and incomprehensible 'legalities'. The file, having sadistically been made bulky, is flying from this table to that, thanks to the ace red-tapists, and their artistically excellent kick-shots of the bureaucratic football game expertise. The section of teachers [who ‘lovingly’ became slaves of the then VC, the plagiarist and scamster] has illegally taken higher pay and promotion in brazen violation of the UGC-Govt order F. No. 1-2/2009(EC/PS) Pt. V dated 14 September 2010 [Sr. No. 108, UGC website, section ‘Notices’]; unsurprisingly, the claim of the similarly positioned teachers remain in abeyance. Another Central University had to make recovery of the over-paid salary in similar case.The AMUTA remains silent on this bizarre illegality; and on the issue of Sr. Scale, it prefers not to move beyond the ritual of passing a resolution by its Executive Committee. The most “visible” Marxists of the campus have already displayed their worst form of slavery and establishmentarian politics, extracting unscrupulous favours for more privileged cadres, while wilfully discrediting their own politics, ideology and organization. A sect(ion) of Islamists will teach us everything which could help get us Behisht after our death (one votary of it was, and is still there, in the EC which 'denied' the Sr. Scale). Another sect(ion) of the Islamists seem to be suggesting through their silence and inaction that all justice will be dispensed only after they will succeed in establishing the Hukumat-e-Ilahiya or Nizam-e-Mustafa, at least in AMU, if not elsewhere on the planet. Yet another sect(ion) of the Islamists might be suggesting them to pay obeisance to some pirs’ khanqahs, seeking the intercession of those exalted souls for favourable divine intervention, and that the human agency, by now, stands incapacitated.All else might well be enjoying such a lovely game of football, shouting aloud in ecstasy, deep within their hearts. Who says, these connoisseurs of the art of game, are insensitive’?Tujhey kya bataaoon kya hai shab-e-gham buri balaa haiMujhey kya buraa tha marna agar ek baar hota (Ghalib) POSTSRIPT: Plz keep watching this space for expose' on the dark-room manipulations by the age-old power brokers [across the spectrum] of AMU to grab the post of Pro Vice Chancellor, of course by invoking 19 (3). Regards,Mohammad Sajjad Asstt. Prof. Centre of Advanced Study in History Aligarh Muslim University (India)

Illegal AMU Centre at Mallapuram, Kerala

AMU Centre, Malappuram Non-existent:Dedicated to the Nation by Sibal: Unworthy Rulers!P. M. reassurance to the Nation may hold promise for AMU too! This declaration was made at Malappuram on 24.12.11 with all the fanfare with posters of Congress leaders, Sonia Gandhi, Rahul, Indira Gandhi, Dr. ManMohan Singh etc. A grand Congress Party show. Malappuram Centre has the temerity to display its own emblem, as an independent institution! This is a fraud played on the Nation, Muslims and AMU; as the Centre cannot legally be created under AMU Act. nor is the Govt. so empowered of its own nor the clandestinely and fraudulently proposed amendments of the Statutes approved by the competent Parliament (as required under the Section 31 (4) and (5) of the AMU Act), nor is the Visitor empowered to approve the amendments of Statutes as claimed nor is the AMU empowered to offer concessions to Muslims (as the Minority Status has been struck down by the Court in 2005 (no efforts made by the VC and MHRD to bring fresh amendments in the Act. to meet the Court objections to restore the status).Moreover, two PIL are pending in UP, High Court against the establishment of AMU Centres and the University and the Govt. who have nothing to defend their designs are using delaying tactics to prolong the proceedings. Azis s confession that the next VC may not continue with these Centres speak loud and clear of the hollowness of the whole exercise. This should settle the issue that the Centres are illegal and non-existent. Look at the double standards. MHRD (under Shri Sibal) had issued, stern direction (18.8.11) to cut, curtail and rationalize expenditures to AMU and all other Govt. organizations and the Visitor (10.8.2011) restrained the VC from taking policy decisions, involving long term financial, academic and administrative implications. Yet the same Shri Sibal became instrumental for the inauguration function of non-existing AMU Centre at huge cost of millions, without any justification and persuaded and permitted the besieged VC to dash to Kishanganj (29.12.11) with a delegation of six and put up a big show to sign the land deal with Bihar Govt. for the establishment of a new AMU Centre, not yet approved by the Govt. Are the Govt. and MHRD not hands in glove with the conniving VC and allowed to violate their own unique restrain orders openly and profusely. They are definitely unworthy to rule and rely upon. It is untrue that the Govt. had ever promised to allocate a thousand crores for any AMU Centre as claimed by the VC (1. 1. 12) leave alone Kishanganj. The total allocations made in Union budget- 2010 – 2011 – Rs. 25 crores each for Murshidabad and Malappuram of which 25 were released for the former and only 10 crores for the later and the utilization of the grants made has not been authorized by the competent EC and FC (over 10crores were spent by the VC unauthorizedly).2011- 2012 – Rs 50 crores for each but the money has not been released nor had the University asked for it. At no point of time, the Govt. made any promise or hinted for allocating a thousand crore or more as claimed by the unreliable boasting VC. Actually, this is all a political stunt and purely a temporary phase and has nothing to do with the welfare of Muslims and their upliftment, but to garner Muslims votes instead as the dispensation (Centres) are legally and practically untenable. We are not very sure, anybody in the Country, has time and concern to take note of the Govt. taking such a liberty but the Muslims and AMU cannot remain mere spectators to the Govt.’s high-handedness, exploitation and making a mockery of everything to have their way, despite the protests by the Teachers’ Association (AMUTA) Old Boys and the well-wishers, Shri Sibal ventured to preside over the inauguration and dedicated the Centre. Congress has always been like this. 4.5% reservation and now 9% are the glaring examples.The frontal role of Muslim League for its electoral gains is all the more objectionable and most disappointing. Things have come to such a pass, that the Muslim organization, ML, openly operating against AMU and Muslims interests, for the petty gains of ML, was unthinkable and horrifying. ML has come a long way from the days of Sulaiman Sait and Banatwala and ceased to play pro-Muslim card, needs a second look, by us all. This is an alarming situation and raises several questions which require answers;Who is this all powerful Shri Sibal who is above law and has dedicated a non-existing so-called Centre? Where and how does this AMU Centre exist? What are the custodians of law and champions of justice in the Country doing and allowed this? How long the Congress be allowed to exploit Muslims for votes and keep them deprived at the same time? To what are the Muslim political and religions leadership upto? Whos interest they are protecting? Do they have lost all senses and accepted to play stooge for all time to come for personal petty considerations. Should the AMU Community be taken for granted? Or they consider themselves answerable as enlightened and responsible class to whose care fortunately or unfortunately the Alma Matter has been given and are determined to deliver, even if left alone.Hope is generated, however, by the renewed assurance of the P. M. on the New Year eve that his Govt. shall provide a more efficient and honest governance. Let us see what comes out of the deliberately much delayed CBI. CVC and CAG probe report (PE submitted before 11.1.2012 in view of the hearing under PIL before Delhi High Court coming up on 11th) by 17.1. 2012 the day the guilty Azis, quits office, most unwillingly and reluctantly as the Govt. found itself without powers to retain him in office a day beyond 17.1.12.Anyway, before the Govt. reaches for the inevitable, is it expecting too much from the most honorable VC to quit peacefully and gracefully on his own before 17.1.12!!!It is learned that Azis has no repentance and regrets for the wrongs and the harm done to the Alma Mater and why should he be expected to behave honourably?
Readers, please respond at ziauddinahmad(at)yahoo.co.in
Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad (Retd)
Dept of Botany
AMU, Aligarh

AMU Affairs – Centres: Sibal lied and lied again! So what?

What has happened? Mr. Shahi ex-Advocate General, now Minister HRD, Bihar, sought an appointment and met Shri Kapil Sibal on 3.11.11 in connection with the proposed AMU Centre at Kishanganj. Shri Sibal informed him that nothing can be done now as a writ is pending in the High Court (Ref. T01, Patna dated 12.11 11) Thereafter, the protagonists of AMU Centre (largely Muslims and those belonging to ruling Congress) rushed to Shri Sibal and pet came the reply that the case pending in the Court has been disposed of, meaning thereby there are no hurdles.This is a lie: Two PIL are pending in Allahabad High Court by Z K Faizan and S.M. Subhan Naqvi and a stay order too and the University and MHRD are buying time to prolong the case. Moreover, required Statutes for the establishment of these Centres have not yet been amended. But the Centres are functioning under the umbrella of UPA. Instead and more importantly it was incumbent on Shri Sibal in the light of the Visitors restrain order (dated 10.8.11) to enlighten Bihar and misled Muslims and others (if any) protagonists the Co-ordination Committee of AMU Centres, straight away that nothing can be done now in the matter of establishment of Centres as it constitutes policy decision of far-reaching consequences (financial and otherwise) disallowed by the Visitor! But surprisingly, Shri Sibal preferred to enlighten that the VC can take any actions he deems fit in the matter and has all the powers, which is wrong and mischievous. Besides the restrain imposed by the Visitor, the University requires the approval of all its Authorities- Court, E.C, AC, and Faculties in the matter, and the VC is positively powerless.Furthermore on the basis of AMU experiences with MHRD and Shri Sibal, it could safely be concluded that Shri Sibal purposely avoided referring the Visitor’s order because MHRD is keeping silence rather encouraging the non observance of the Visitors order in several actions taken by the shielded VC). Similarly, the same Shri Sibal claimed (on record) that his Ministry has no role in the establishment of extremely controversial and blatantly illegal AMU Centres and it is the University own doing (as if, of late the University has been bestowed with unlimited powers.) This was also a big lie. Not only the MHRD, the entire UPA Govt. were providing guidance, strategic support, money (sanctions in the Union budget, fraudulently 2009-2010) and fool-proof cover to VC to mis-use powers. Shri Salman Khurshid holds the same view. This also reminds us of public pronouncement Shri Sibal made on 2G losses with all authority at his command and got exposed.On TV Shri Sibal in the heat of the discussion offered to face punishment, if he has done a wrong. It follows from the confidence he exuberated that telling lies, mis-interpreting laws, making false promises and denials do not constitute wrongs. They are strategies to survive and the Cabinet Ministers are within their rights to adopt this whenever it suits them. Education under the jurisdiction of such a person is a definite casualty, a blunder!Important:1. So-called AMU Centres are out rightly illegal and anti-University and do not stand a chance before the law.2. Every now and then there is an appeal, demand rather an upheaval for Unity amongst Muslims for justifiable reasons but it cannot be achieved the way we treat each other- AMU is mis-treated by Muslims themselves as agents of the Govt. or for ulterior personal gains? By and large Community has played no noticeable role to help AMU in this hour of crisis, giving the ill-intentioned UPA room to meddle with AMU the way it suits them.

Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad

Dept of Botany, AMU Aligarh

He can be reached at

ziauddinahmad.(AT).yahoo.co.in

AMU: Visitor Looking The Other Way Or Is The Silence Meaningful?

AMU: Visitor Looking The Other Way Or Is The Silence Meaningful?

Apparently large amount of complaints and institution of CBI, CAG and CVC probes by the Visitor and the fag end of the tenure of the VC, Abdul Azis (retiring in Jan, 2012) forced the Visitors to issue directives (advisory) dated 10.8.11 to restrain the VC *………………restrained from making appointments ………….. as also form taking any policy decision which may have long term financial or other implications on the executive and academic functioning of the ‘University*

But the VC who has been violating rules at will with impunity (asserted in meetings ‘I am the law’ and at the same time vehemently denied publicly that he has not violated any rules). Would he as habitual defaulter, have any hesitation in defying the directives of the Visitors?

1. Irresistible VC, making all out attempts to prompt and instigate the Muslims residents of Kishanganj Malegoan and Aurangabad rather playing a Muslim card to provide land free of cost to the University for the establishment of the so-called (illegal and anti-University) Centres.

Moreover no funds have been sanctioned for Kishanganj or Malegoan or Aurangabad and the funds required should be of the order of about 400 crores for each Centre as proposed by Fatimi Committee of the MHRD. The fate of Murshidabad and Malappuram Centres is too well known because of the acute shortage of funds.

Furthermore, the University has not approved Centres at Malegoan and Aurangabad nor did it authorize the VC for the purpose nor is the VC so empowered. However, the recklessness of the VC is abound and the Govt. which cannot plead ignorance of the traits of the VC, was expected to keep a close watch to contain the VC, failed tamely.

Not only this he has dared a delegation, of five senior teachers to Aurangabad etc on 25^th Oct 2011 by air despite the ban imposed on financial expenditures by the MHRD (18.8.11)

2. Proposed taking over of the Union Sec. School, a private School, by the University.

3. Proposed introduction of new admission system for admission to Medical faculty

4. Expenditures are being incurred on air-travels, visits, conferences, celebrations and entertainments, in lakhs of rupees without exercising any restrain as desired by MHRD (18.8.11)

All these issues fall under policy matters with far-reaching financial and administrative and academic implications and the imposed financial crunch, are therefore, in abundant defiance of the Visitors/MHRD directives.

Shri Kapil Sibal was very much expected (4.11.2011) to sound the Bihar Govt. on .seeking clarification on the establishment of Centre at Kishanganj, that the Visitor’s directive does not permit such a policy decision. Instead, perhaps in his ignorance or otherwise, referred the writ pending in the High Court, as the reason for restraining to proceed in the matter.

Obviously, after having issued the directives it was incumbent on the Govt. to remain watchful and take all appropriate actions to insure the observance of the directives issued

But the Govt. has clearly faltered and failed to contain the unstoppable VC, Is it really a failure due to connivance or the Govt. has other ideas and waiting for the CBI report which is due any day, Justice, however, demanded that the Govt. should have acted now to stop the VC from such misadventures and the liberties enjoyed by the besieged VC in every day functioning reflects upon the Govt. credibility.

Important: So-called AMU Centres are misconceived, out rightly illegal, anti-University and shall not stand a chance in the Court of Law (two PIL pending in the Court)!

The report of the CBI probe is expected any day! Actually it was due in Oct. itself per schedule!

Waese loot machi hai ! Ek-ek din bhari hai

Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad (Retd.)
Dept of Botany
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh

He can be reached at

ziauddinahmad.(AT).yahoo.co.in

Hidden Agenda of Congress Party in Destroying AMU's Residential Character?

Subject: AMU centres...No one answers the questions just going on invasively....

Dear All

ASAK,

Some of the alumni have a legitimate concern about the direction, our debate both for and against the centers is taking; personal comments and biases have also come to the fore and it is but natural that some of us are perturbed over that. However, just being a good human doesn't make one immune from personal and other influences and sometimes they do affect initiatives as well as responses.

Some points of information first:--

* Till date no post i.e. teaching as well as non teaching has been sanctioned for the centers. All posts on which appointments have been made have been illegally transferred from the Campus, by depriving and starving the Departments here at Aligarh.

* Crores of rupees recieved from different funding agencies has been siphoned off for the Centers. For example, the Ministry of Health, GOI, specially sanctioned approx Rs. One Crore to purchase critical care equipment such as Ventilators at the JNMC Hospital, this has been diverted to build boundary walls at Mallapuram/Murshidabad, meanwhile persons continue to die at Aligarh.

* The University has been generally refusing travel grant to attend conferences from May this financial year, despite the VC's proclamations to the contrary, however about Rs Three lacs were spent on TA/DA for appointment of guest faculty at these Centers. A little more was spent on the visit to Maharashtra. Where did this money come from? No special grant has been given for these inspection tours by the UGC/ MHRD.It is the AMU that you know that is bearing this burden from its normal grant.

I would liike to give a point by point response to the questions being asked in this thread, but some of the points were already answered a few months back by some of us, as a first step therefore, I am again posting a few lines sent earlier (in May 2010) with the commitment that I hope to present a really brief response in a day or two

"... many ...persons at AMU and outside feel, that despite everything else 'the establishment of Centres is a big achievement of AMU'.This sentiment has dominated the web space but not the real world, where there is a gut feeling that something is not quite right but, there are not enough cogent arguments to articulate the feeling.I am worried about whom to address? and, Whom to focus on? As far as AMU Centres are concerned. There is total confusion on what has been done? Who has done what? What are we trying to do? There is no reason to doubt anybody's sincerity on either side of the divide except of course of politicians, those with a questionable past and their hangers on. Except for these everyone has the best interests of the institution at heart.

At the risk of being taken to be long winded, pedantic, heavy and also confused I would invite you to consider the following

There are three main issues involved here, that may be asked as questions and whose answers may help in bringing clarity, the first issue is who benefits from these centers? The second is, is it beneficial or harmful for the university as an institution to go ahead with this endevour? And the final question (which is connected to the second) is do the existing laws make any provision to set up centers or shall we have to go in for amendment of the Act?

Let's start with a rhetorical question

"Who benefits from these Centers?"

Answer would be "Muslims obviously"

The next question should be 'How?'

This is where you do not have a glib response, you have to pause and ponder, because the University does not reserve seats for Muslims and, has never done so except a misadventure recently which is now in the Supreme Court of India, it does not give preferential admission to Muslims, it in fact is barred by law to practise any sort of discrimination.

So 'How?' still remains unanswered!

An additional weak argument that, these centers are in Muslim majority areas so more Muslims would get in, doesn't hold water as admission is by merit not by region or religion.

Additionally you only have to look at the statements made by Mr. Nitish Kumar and by the VC Prof Azis that these centers shall not have any reservation for Muslims and they are open to everyone. Similar statements regarding AMU in the context of minority colleges and institutions have also been made by the Minority affairs minister Mr. Salman Khursheed.

The logical corollary of the above would be `Then why this song and dance about the centers?'

This is where a little reflection would reveal the dirty business of politics, all political parties know that Muslims have been left behind on all fronts but there is a small increasingly vocal elite (comprising retired civil servants, professionals in various fields, NRIs , moulavis and caste leaders), which is articulating the sense of deprivation and demanding action and answers.

So politicians have resorted to tokenism, the lead as always being taken by the Congress party in states where elections are due, where Muslims are more aware of the lack of development in their areas and community. The ruling combine in these states also want Muslims to continue supporting them, so we have competitive populism where no one wants to be labeled a laggard or being perceived as grudging Muslims their place in the sun, so a university which world over is recognized as a beacon of hope for modern scientific outlook among Muslims is being projected to play a role which it never sought to play.

The Aligarh Muslim University was never intended or conceived to be the University Grants Commission of Indian Muslims, if any government or any governing party is serious about Muslim education then they should open colleges and universities which can cater to the Muslims. Why drag AMU into a role which would destroy whatever we have, whatever we have achieved. Let me clarify a bit:--

There are two broad types of university models in India (here universities, public funded and private can only be established by legislation) one is a unitary type with a bound and defined campus as well as properly demarcated areas of jurisdiction, these are generally residential universities;

The other is the affiliating type which has a broad area of jurisdiction extending over many districts and which have affiliated colleges that admit students independent of the University, but basic eligibility norm is set by the university concerned, they teach syllabi set by the university, students appear in exams decided by the university. Sometimes these universities also have post graduate departments but most of the time they are glorified examination boards, individual teachers especially in the colleges have no control over the syllabus, method of evaluation, evaluators etc, that are all decided by boards at the University level which also have some teacher representatives, in essence individual teachers have no autonomy.

On the other hand unitary universities like AMU, BHU and nearly all Central Universities, have a governance structure where teachers decide what is to be taught, how it is to be taught, how it is to be evaluated and who would evaluate it, similarly they decide who is to be admitted how they are to be admitted, and what is the eligibility condition(s). Here teachers also decide the creation, up gradation of teaching posts and their fields of specialization at the time of creation, teachers are also empowered to decide on topics for research and supervisors, we at AMU are also privileged to decide which conference to organize at Aligarh and on what theme/topic. All this is possible because our Act and other similar Acts have a provision of the Board of Studies at the lowest level which comprises of all the teachers of the Department along with certain other persons including those who are conducting research in the Department. This very significant

provision is not properly understood by persons working or coming from non unitary universities such as most state universities, like B.R.Ambedkar University, Agra or Bundelkhand University, Jhansi or Kerala University.

The point to be understood here is that if a Center is established what kind of structure would we have there? Shall we have one Department in Aligarh? In that case what happens to the teachers teaching at these so called centers, what kind of control shall they have over the courses they would be teaching? Shall we have parallel Departments at these new places? But these are prohibited by law and even in Delhi University which also has powers of an affiliating University the South campus and the original North campus do not have duplicate departments. World over Residential Universities are accepted as better institutions for teaching and research.

The Government of the day understands all these niceties and intricacies as the passage of the Central Universities Act in 2009 shows, where all these sensibilities of jurisdiction and all India character are taken into account, around the same time the Delhi Government also realized the need for a residential University so a new university was proposed to be established in Delhi. It is interesting to note that all these new Central Universities and all the previously established Central Universities have a territorial jurisdiction. I.e. everywhere the respective Act gives the boundaries of their influence . Only a few Institutions have a pan India jurisdiction such as the Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Indira Gandhi National Open University so they are in the true sense of the term, exceptions. This is so because we have borrowed our model from the British where the norm is the Residential system as it prevails in say Oxford and Cambridge.

What I am trying to prove is that even if you accept the concept of the so called "Centers, Special Centers, Advanced Centers, Campuses" nothing can be established without amending the University Act as it exists at present. It is all a political mirage which vested interests are interested to display till the next elections at least.

Now that the Muslim advantage/benefit mirage is out of the way let us see what the University has done under the existing provisions about setting up the so called centers:--

A suggestion was made by the University Court in Dec2007 to set up advanced centers `in principle', in Jan 2008 the Executive Council of the University accepted the suggestion to establish, hold your breath, satellite campuses, now I don't have to tell anyone that nomenclature is a very important thing, so did anyone have or still has clarity on what was/is being proposed, except that something was being set up. In Feb 2008 I.e., before any other authority of the University had considered the proposal a letter was sent to the President of India to accord `In principle' approval of the so called special centers/parallel campuses/ centers of the AMU. What is the laid down procedure in the Act if something much smaller in scale is to be attempted such as a Department of Studies or a center like Women Studies or Career Planning Center or Cardiology Center or Endocrinology center is set up:

According to the Section 28(5) of the University Act any member of the University court may make any proposal which if approved shall be considered at its next meeting by the EC it reads (5) Any member of the Court may propose to the Court, the draft of any Statute and the Court may reject the proposal or refer such draft for consideration to the Executive Council, which may either reject the proposal or submit the draft to the Court in such form as the Executive Council may approve and…**This is then followed by a reference to Section28(3) which reads

(3) The Executive Council may propose to the Court the draft of any Statutes for its consideration and such draft shall be considered by the Court at its next meeting: Provided that the Executive Council shall not propose the draft of any Statute or of any amendment of a Statute affecting the status

powers or constitution of any authority of the University until such authority has been given an opportunity of expressing an opinion in writing upon the proposal and any opinion so expressed shall be considered by the Court. This is the procedure referred to in the last part of the Subsection(5) which reads …**the provisions of this section shall apply in the case of any draft so submitted as they apply in the case of a draft proposed by the Executive Council. i.e. as given in subsection3.

Now in case you are getting confused permit me to lay down the procedure of any change in the university structure

1. A proposal for setting up a new department or centre can emanate from any of the Authorities of the University viz. the Faculty(ies), the Academic Council, the Executive Council and the University Court and sometimes also from the Board of Studies which is not an authority. All this however is subject to the following

1.1. Statute 20(2) which reads as follows (2) (a) Each Faculty shall consist of such Departments as may be assigned to it by the Ordinances.

(b) No Department shall be established or abolished except by the Statutes.

1.2.And Section 2(e) of the Act reads (e) "Department" means a Department of Studies and includes a Centre of Studies established by the Ordinances;

2.In both cases, whether the proposal came from the top or the bottom, it is first discussed in all democratic bodies and if it is accepted by all then the procedure of change in Statute or Ordinance is taken up which only starts at the lowest level of the BOS and goes up to the University Court.

2.1. At all places where powers are assigned the phrase "Subject to the Act, the Statutes and the Ordinances"is given this includes Section 12(2) of the Act which talks of sanction of the Visitor.

2.2.What should be understood by this phrase except that you can only do which is allowed, not that which is not allowed in the Act.

2.3.The Act very categorically says in the preamble the intention to set up a `Teaching and residential university at Aligarh' it also says at Section 5(9A) "Twenty five Kilometers of the University Mosque" also "special centers". The actual language at both 5(9A) and Section 12(2) is reproduced below

Section 5*(9A) to establish within a radius of twenty five kilometres of the University Mosque such special Centres, specialized Laboratories or other units for research and instruction as are, in the opinion of the University, necessary for the furtherance of its objects;

Section 12(2) The University may also, with the sanction of the Visitor and subject to the Statutes and Ordinances, *establish and maintain such Special Centres, Specialized Laboratories or such other institutions for research or instruction as are necessary for the furtherance of its objects either on its own or in cooperation or collaboration with any other institution.

Additionally even Section 12(1) which s concerned with schools also talks of 15 miles, so the intention of the lawmakers are obvious, no expansion beyond a physical limit.

2.4 An example from the past may be looked at. During the tenure of Prof Naseem Farooqui as VC 1990—1994, the then PVC Prof Abul Hasan Siddiqui had come up with a proposal to set up a new Medical College near Lucknow at Sitapur road for which land was also being made available. Then also many well meaning individuals had welcomed the proposal and had seen in it the future of the University, however there was disquiet on the campus because it was seen as opening the backdoor to a permanent harmful change to the University's structure, but in keeping with our traditions very few were willing to make their disquiet known on record.

When the matter came up in the Academic Council it was passed by majority vote but there were three notes of dissent which spelt out the above provisions, stressed that `subject to…' can only mean that which is allowed and; that before any further processing, the matter be referred to the Ministry of Law, Govt. of India. This was the end of the matter.

2.5 Similarly Centers set up during the tenure of Mr.Mahmoodur Rahman as VC 1995—2000, were wound up later, during Mr. Hamid Ansari's tenure, as not being in consonance with the Act, Statutes and Ordinances.

3.What is a `Special Center' or a `Specialised Laboratory', this obviously is something which does not exist in the University but the University feels that this requirement/gap/ needs to be filled up, so a provision is made in the rules to fill up such a lacunae. It definitely does not allow the setting up of parallel departments or campuses anywhere.

3.1The President is said to have given her consent `in principle' for `Centers' under Section 12(2), this section covers only special centers so what is this entity "Centers"? and what does "in Principle" mean? Does it mean the idea is prima facie acceptable but, a proper concrete proposal is required when a final view and decision shall be taken. It does not by any stretch of imagination allow for teaching to start in a makeshift manner. What happens to the `Brand AMU' for which a high profile committee was set up? Even those who concede the basic principle of centers being setup are worried, is this how we shall provide degrees in a half baked manner and with makeshift faculty and facilities? Shall we have a different admission policy for these places? Who is an internal student here and who is not? Even if admission is offered to students currently studying here in the internal quota will they go there? What shall be the final profile of the students and the teaches? These are the questions the supporters of the idea are asking but, don't have the nerve to ask in public for fear of annoying the VC. Maybe this why in all elections held recently an overwhelming number, more than three fourths, voted against persons perceived to be supported by the administration. Why are we in such a tearing hurry to destroy everything? Just as that half baked idea of Muslim reservation destroyed decades of our quiet work in education.

4. It follows, therefore, that the proposal is bound by two limits; it should not breach the 25 Km limit and, it can only be within the existing system i.e. it should not tinker with the basic structure of the Institution which is at Aligarh and which is residential. I would like to draw your attention to the doctrine of the basic structure of the Constitution which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, I suggest it is a similar case here at AMU.

4.1How is the basic structure to be determined? A basic structure involves institutional goals and aspirations as well as methods and powers to achieve them, through a laid down system of academic and administrative information flow and decision making which has to be processed through certain authorities (bodies). All Government institutions including AMU have this system in place for anyone to analyse and discuss, for AMU it is ___ Teaching and residential at Aligarh along with the Department and Faculty system with local decision making.

I have it on the authority of one of the most distinguished scholars ever produced by this University, a name which has and still inspires awe in academia, that the AMU Act shall require amendments before any of the Centers(?) as conceived by the present administration see the light of the day. I had respectfully argued that this will change the university as we know it and, although we have not been brilliant and outstanding, except for notable exceptions, we may even be harmed and, lose whatever we have achieved and have come to stand for. I also raised questions of academic governance and administrative organisation which I have already spelt out above, we are not able to properly manage a bound campus, how would we manage a far flung atomized structure? His answer was illuminating. He said it is politics and it is the politics of governance and, every political party is making use of the opportunity being offered. He also mentioned that if the

proposal is to work, separate universities shall have to be set up, in the present form it seems to be unworkable as regional feelings and aspirations shall come into play. As ours was an informal discussion it shall not be proper to mention names, but I hope readers shall get the general picture of disquiet that most of us have here.

I hope I have answered the third question I had posed at the beginning of this letter, that the present Act does not allow such centers to be set up.

Finally, after the third question let me try to answer the second question I posed earlier, let me try to do it without using the term Muslim as Mr. Hamid Ansari, during his tenure as VC here, was fond of asking us to do. The second question was `does it benefit AMU as an institution to go in for these changes' meaning does the stature of AMU increase or as our present VC is fond of saying does `Brand AMU' gain prestige ? The answer very categorically is NO. Why? Well because we as an institution have not contributed very much in pure academic terms except the individual brilliance of scholars who can be counted on our fingers. No doubt we have also had great litterateurs but they just happened to be here, they were creators, not interpreters or analysts or great teachers. So brand AMU is known more for the total individual it produces a strange mixture of a sardonic wit, an appreciator of all good things of life but, a person who retains a sense of belonging and so remembers that one should do something for society, a person who is simultaneously both religious as well as irreligious with a healthy dose of skepticism thrown in. This product is produced in Aligarh, in the hostels, library, classrooms here. It would not be produced in a Kishanganj and Murshidabad or Mallapuram or Bhopal or Pune, and I am not being snobbish or denigrating anyone or any place here. The individual who wants to do something for the deprived sections of society can be and is produced elsewhere also, but it is only here that you get an Aligarian which I fear you would not get elsewhere.

Today is May 30,2010 the VC is in a high profile meeting in Delhi (all senior officers were asked to accompany him), this is to be followed by a press conference where we shall get to know the laurels AMU is earning, the new centers, the new courses we shall be having etc. This place which is said to contain a high concentration of educated persons of all communities, including the highest concentration of educated Muslims in India is being ignored. On the other hand, people who left India many years back, who are working in different systems with different models of education, where social justice has a different connotation and different solutions are being roped in to give advice. Why? Is it because they add glamour? It is not that these persons will not or cannot contribute, of course they will, with their differing experiences, bring a new perspective to the table, but the framework has to be according to our needs and requirements and drawn up by

us, who live that reality, not someone who has a romaticised notion of the past, these experts should come in only after a basic plan has been agreed upon not earlier.

Here on the Campus there is no electricity since yesterday i.e more than 24 hours. Supply has been restored in the city, where we all know there is corruption all round, last night itself. In our great campus which is planning to open centers and what not, the students who are appearing in exams have been left to fend for themselves in this sweltering heat where there is no electricity in any Hall, MA Library, Department etc. They (students) are not making any hue and cry although they see that the central offices continue to have electricity for ACs, the VC's lodge is lit up in total darkness all-round like always, unique like an oasis in a sea of sand, they are quietly preparing for their exams. These are the same `rowdy students' for whom we require a continuous surveillance system with high tech cameras and all. Incidentally three camera towers including the control tower have come down; this is an indicator of the slipshod quality control we practice, even for things that we passionately espouse.

Today is May 31, 2010 still no electricity still no change, the University has money to put in place a high tech security structure because it has played upon the latent Muslim phobia of the security apparatus, it has no money to put up electricity poles, lack of the latter adversely affects research, teaching, learning ,exams; lack of the former only affects the pockets of the suppliers and the psychological state of the administration. The employees of the Electricity Department are working tirelessly to restore supply but the Land & Gardens office is sitting idle, it has not moved to remove the broken trees and their branches from the roads and electricity cables and poles. We do not have a disaster response system, every year we have storms, every year we have rains, every year we have recurring crises but we have knee jerk reactions; we are so involved in our support to the administration that we forget to tell the emperor about the clothes he is wearing.

I hope I have been able to put across a point of view which you would understand and respond to.

S. Mustafa Zaidi

Hony. Secretary, AMU Teachers’ Association, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh

Email: s_mustafa_zaidi(AT)yahoo.co.in

Student 1968-1974, Teacher 1978- till date, Teachers' Representative 1982

Former Member University Court, Former Member Academic Council,

Former Member Examination Committee and member of many Committees set up by the Executive Council, Academic Council and the University administration on different issues.

(Message Posted on "worldofaligs" AMU Alumni Network Yahoo Groups on Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 14:49:34 +0530)

Muslim Face of UPA Rejected by Aligarh Muslim University Community

UPA Muslim-face Rejected by A.M.U.

Mr. Salman Khurshid, the only Muslim Cabinet Minister, many Muslims so believe. They also believe that his promotion to the Cabinet rank owes to this. He is planted to mingle, appease and serve Muslim interests, if possible or at least keep them expecting, confused and guessing, somehow, in order to keep them in good humour, if not won over.

The reckoning of Mr. Salman amongst Muslims has always been low and the incident of 17th Oct, 2011 has further damaged it because the opposition of the Congress has surfaced with full fury.

Neither AMU nor UPA visualized this. However, the fault lies with Mr. Salman and the Party Bosses who failed to realize the gravity of the situation. Actually, the anger and resentment reached its nadir long ago with the coming up of the so-called AMU Centres in 2009 and simultaneous patronization of the ill-intentioned VC for the purpose, who took the liberty to plunder at will with impunity.

Mr. Salman was hurt and disappointed because he could not pay visit to the place of birth and the place close to his heart, where the glorious son of AMU, Zakir Sahab his grandfather, was the VC. His hurt is misplaced because in recent past he was the guest of this very AMUTA twice and he is welcome to Aligarh any time even now but not the way he planned to provide legitimacy and encouragement to the worst-ever VC, most probably at the behest of Party Bosses. Not only this, Mr. Salman was approached repeatedly by teachers, and well-wishers of Aligarh for help and he cannot plead ignorance of the harm done to AMU in the last four years of Azis, destroying its discipline, traditions and values, academic standards, threatening its very existence, to say the least.

The Govt. is giving the impression loud and clear that it has no power to remove the VC. Would Mr. Salman a jurist of substance, endorse this stand that there is one more person in this great democratic country after the President of India, who is above the law and he is the present AMU VC!!!

What is the purpose of inquiry after inquiry without any result? Is the government buying time so that Mr. Azis may complete his term?

All actions of the Govt. remain suspect unless immediate action is taken to remove Azis from office.

Ziauddin Ahmad and others

Prof Ziauddin Ahmad was formerly Professor in the Dept of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. He can be raeched at

Law and Minority Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid failed to enter the AMU Campus

AMU Salman Khurshid failed to enter the AMU Campus: A blunder led to confrontation with Congress, head on !

Facts speak for themselves: readers make their own assessments & respond:

Shri Salman was the Chief Guest for the Sir Syed Day on 17th (many other having declined). Friends, Aligs and AMUTA, asked, advised even warned him, not to go Aligarh as long as the accused Azis is there, for reasons so well known. He was, therefore, initially reluctant, but then agreed because he nurses a deep desire to impress his Party Bosses that he has a place amongst the Muslims (you know better, his performance) and tows the dubious Congress policy of supporting the corrupt VC, for the sake of illegal AMU Centres to befool Muslims. The occasion, was favorable and convenient and he was lured to take the plunge. In his enthusiasm coupled surely with intoxication, he refused to appreciate the proposed black flag protest by AMUTA, and the respect he should hold for teachers at his place of birth, (he was the guest of honour for the same function organized by the AMUTA). However, AMUTA on its part warned in advance, the Congress leadership of its resentment and proposed protest. The new banners put up on the road by AMUTA explained it all;

Unreliable Salman Khurshid is not welcome.

Illegal off-campus Centres, Congress Conspiracy to Finish AMU.

Law Minister in AMU makes CBI probe suspect.

Dubious Congress shielding corrupt VC.

Visitors Restrain Order flouted by VC.

AMUTA had no intentions to block his entry and they made it known to the Dist. Administration. It was a different matter that the agitating students opposite the VC lodge were hugely encouraged by the presence of their teachers picketing next to them at the Staff Club and were found determined to turn Shri Salman out. Round 7 pm the road from Babe-e-Syed to the VC lodge, when Shri. Salman was expected to enter the Campus, was swarmed by students in thousands. Certainly, an ugly situation was saved by the timely intervention of the Dist. Adm.
Shri Salman reached the outskirts and waited for an hour and had discussion with the Dist. Administration which expressed its inability to ensure his trouble free entry in the Campus forcing him to quietly slip to the house of his pet Shri Bansal, local congress MLC and even refused the dinner in his honour at the Women’s College, a safe place.

Events will take such a turn, nobody had actually expected which is a fair indication of the anger brewing on the Campus against the Congress.

However, University official function was held as a formality with thin attendance of the hand picked audience and non-stop shouting and chanting by students. In the rest of the University the celebration went on with the usual fervour including the Staff Club, the teachers bastion.
One the Side lines Shri. Salman (to the question by the press) asserted that the Govt. has no role in the establishment of the illegal AMU Centres and this is all University’s own doing. This is totally incorrect and misleading and unconvincing. Such a degree of insensitivity of a Minister promoted to the rank of the Cabinet Minister and given portfolios to win and appease Muslims, shall leave him nowhere and lead to further alienation of Muslims, a very high price, the Congress can hardly afford to pay.

The whole world knows that the blessed misconceived AMU Centres were high on Govt agenda and their task made easy by collaborator Prof. Azis, who is a manipulator and has no scrupulous with full Govt. encouragement, protection and support in every way possible provided to him for the purpose. It can also not be denied that the VC in barter earned the freedom to plunder at will which the Govt. failed to contain and therefore inquiry after inquiry brought no results, created a scam of scams and the on going CBI, CVC and CAG probes have become suspects. Shri Salman who swears by AMU has done nothing to contain the VC, restrain his Govt. and protect AMU from the repercussions of the illegal AMU Centres which may ultimately finish AMU.

The present episode in Aligarh was a blunder on the part of UPA and Shri Salman, and fortunately or unfortunately they have taste of AMU and its resentment, the tide has turned against them and the line is finally drawn.

It is upto UPA to mend fences with AMU and surely the Muslims of India, by removing the VC immediately. No excuses. Let us be friends again if irritant is removed.
Aligarh se khilwadh bahut mehngah padega! Baqi aap ki marzi!

Hashmat Ali Khan
Advocate, Aligarh

Posted on on Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:58 PM

Author can be reached at